Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 03:29:45 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Nik Clayton <nik@blueberry.co.uk> Cc: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is Thot (WYSIWIG editor) for you? Message-ID: <199705141029.DAA06486@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 May 1997 09:59:07 BST." <19970514095907.40722@blueberry.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I am going to investigate how can Thot support directly DocBook. As Thot is it can export Thot (native format), LaTex, and HTML. Amancio >From The Desk Of Nik Clayton : > On Wed, May 14, 1997 at 01:05:50AM -0700, Amancio Hasty wrote: > > What I am pitching is for is that if Thot is good we can start advertising it > > and hopefully standardize our internal documentation based on its format. > > Internal documentation meaning things like : reports, articles, etc... > > Um, whos internal documentation? > > Yours (as in, your own personal stuff), or the FreeBSD project's (articles, > FAQ, Handbook and so on). > > If the latter, what's wrong with DocBook, particularly with John Fieber's > first cut at tutorial documentation at > > http://fallout.campusview.indiana.edu/~jfieber/docbook/markupguide.html > > Or have I got the wrong end of the stick, and you can use Thot to write > DocBook markup (at which point the masses start screaming "Emacs + psgml" > :-) ) > > N > -- > --+=[ Blueberry Hill Blueberry New Media ]=+- - > --+=[ http://www.blueberry.co.uk/ 1/9 Chelsea Harbour Design Centre, ]=+- - > --+=[ WebMaster@blueberry.co.uk London, England, SW10 0XE ]=+- - > --+=[ Those who do not read Dilbert are doomed to repeat it ]ENT P
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705141029.DAA06486>